Henry IV (1399-1413), the son of John of Gaunt, duke of Lancaster, seized the English throne at the age of thirty-two from his cousin Richard II and held it until his death, aged forty-five, when he was succeeded by his son, Henry V. This comprehensive and nuanced biography restores to his rightful place a king often overlooked in favor of his illustrious progeny. Henry faced the usual problems … problems of usurpers: foreign wars, rebellions, and plots, as well as the ambitions and demands of the Lancastrian retainers who had helped him win the throne. By 1406 his rule was broadly established, and although he became ill shortly after this and never fully recovered, he retained ultimate power until his death. Using a wide variety of previously untapped archival materials, Chris Given-Wilson reveals a cultured, extravagant, and skeptical monarch who crushed opposition ruthlessly but never quite succeeded in satisfying the expectations of his own supporters.”
more
I have read as many of Chris Given-Wilson’s books and monographs that I could get my hands on. To me, he is the go-to historian when I am in need of a straightforward and unbiased opinion. As a historical fiction author, I need to absorb as much information on my subjects as I can find, so I was thrilled when this book became available. Very much in the fashion of Nigel Saul’s authoritative history on Richard II, this volume is quite the information dump. It’s not the kind of book most of us would read for pleasure. Nor, I would say, is it full of minute details; the brush strokes are broad and comprehensive for understanding Henry’s reign. We do get a sense that Henry ruled forever under the shadow of his questionable deeds; the usurpation of a rightful king would haunt him in both his dealings with Parliament and his magnates—and, some said, in his health. In a nutshell, as Given-Wilson tells us in his conclusion, “the kingship of a usurper was qualitatively different from that of a legitimate monarch. Even with kings as manifestly unsuitable as Edward II or Richard II, it took ten or fifteen years for baronial exasperation to turn to talk of deposition and twenty for the threats to be realized; Henry was on the throne for just three months before the first attempt to unseat him.” His government struggled with crippling debts—often because of mismanagement—and the constant disorder both by land (Wales, Northumberland, Scotland, Ireland, and Guyenne) and sea (piracy) put conflicting demands on the foundering exchequer. The Percies and the northerners were a real thorn in his side, and when he finally lost his equanimity and executed Archbishop Scrope in 1405 (Henry was the first English king to do so), he lost much support: “The result was a propaganda coup for Henry’s opponents—already a regicide, this was a king who also executed archbishops—and ecclesiastical censure was bound to follow, as it duly did a few months later when the pope excommunicated all those involved in the archbishop’s death (although without naming them).” It was also thought that Henry’s subsequent illness was God’s retribution for Scrope’s death.
On the other hand, Henry was far more adaptable than Richard II—and more successful in keeping his subjects acquiescent. Whereas Richard could not tolerate criticism, Henry’s closest supporters were at times his staunchest critics in Parliament—and without retaliation. According to the author, “Henry’s personality was, on the whole, well suited to kingship. He kept his friends close and his enemies afraid. Steely and watchful, not to say sly, he also had an easy charm and a wry wit that gave him an aura of accessibility and helped him to work through diplomatic problems, although at times obstinacy clouded his judgment…his championing of chivalric values allowed him to make close friendships with like-minded knights and nobles, and his militant piety won him many plaudits.“ It’s interesting to speculate that if his reign had begun under less inauspicious circumstances, he might have had more opportunity to distinguish himself rather than running around putting out fires.
This is a massive work, and I must admit I struggled through much of it. As a wealth of knowledge I would give it five stars. However, for its readability, I would give it three stars and hence my overall four-star rating. Nonetheless, it’s a must for my research library.